Health: Folate Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Turnberg

Main Page: Lord Turnberg (Labour - Life peer)
Thursday 1st March 2018

(6 years, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Turnberg Portrait Lord Turnberg (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, there are two main reasons why the Government may feel resistant to this. One, which I think we have discarded now, is the dosage level, which we now know is not toxic. The second is that we do not want to be described as a nanny state. If the noble Baroness buys a tuna and sweetcorn sandwich in the Bishops’ Bar, she will find that in the wheat we already add calcium, iron, niacin, thiamin, preservative E282 and treatment agent E300. Nanny state? This folic acid is certainly vital. Does she agree?

Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen Portrait Baroness Chisholm of Owlpen
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I do not think that the nanny state comes into it—certainly not as far as we are concerned. It is interesting that Department of Health officials have told me that its mailbag from the general public has been saying that they do not want mass fortification in their food—but that will all be part of any proceedings going forward in discussions, and it is not what is holding us up at the moment.